Subject: Restriction of legal rights for Jews
Referring to urgent letter of 12 August 1942[372] R 1400/23.7.42/122/1.9.
I. I thought of meeting at first the most urgent need within the compass of my sphere of activity, viz, that of adjusting the administration of justice from a legal point of view, and moreover I had prepared a corresponding draft for the other administration of justice belonging to my sphere of activity. However, I did not want to take the initiative to make suggestions concerning matters which are beyond the sphere of my department.
The draft enclosed in your urgent letter includes all supreme authorities of the Reich, especially that of the Reich Minister and all ministers whose sphere of work is connected with matters of administrative law. While, as far as the sphere of activity of these ministers is concerned I still adhere to the opinion that I should refrain from making suggestions on my part, I declare that I have no objections against an extension of my draft to matters of administrative law and to decisions by administrative authorities.
II. 34529 114058
II. On the assumption that an extensive regulation of the situation of the Jews with regard to legal and administrative decisions is desired, it seems necessary to me that the question of the admissibility for a Jew to testify on oath be legally regulated too, and this regulation had best be included in the same decree.
Therefore, I furthermore suggest that the decree should provide that the Jew is not admissible to testify on oath. Thereby the taking of an oath or the furnishing of an affidavit by Jews is in general impossible.
In my opinion, however, the fact that the Jew is not permitted to take an oath should not make the Jew have a better legal position than the person who is authorized to take an oath. Therefore, I further suggest to include a regulation according to which the testimony of a Jew which could have been made under oath—if it had been given by a person who is permitted to take an oath—should be treated like testimony given under oath as far as criminal cases are concerned. My idea in this connection is that the chiefs of the supreme authorities of the Reich should order administratively that it should be pointed out to the Jew that he could be legally prosecuted if he commits an offense against his duty to give true testimony, but I do not propose to make this a prerequisite of being liable to punishment.
In my opinion, comprehensive settlement of the problem requires furthermore the exclusion, for reasons of foreign policy, of all Jews from the regulations of this decree who are citizens of a foreign nation.
Therefore, under the assumption that the persons participating in the comprehensive solution of the problem and those supreme authorities of the Reich which are in charge of specialized sectors agree, I would suggest to give the following wording to the decree: